Search for: "Few v. State" Results 21 - 40 of 29,297
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 May 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
IntegrateNYC, Inc. v State of New York2024 NY Slip Op 02369Decided on May 02, 2024Appellate Division, First DepartmentMoulton, J.Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.Decided and Entered: May 02, 2024 SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION First Judicial DepartmentSallie Manzanet-DanielsPeter H. [read post]
8 May 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
IntegrateNYC, Inc. v State of New York2024 NY Slip Op 02369Decided on May 02, 2024Appellate Division, First DepartmentMoulton, J.Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.Decided and Entered: May 02, 2024 SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION First Judicial DepartmentSallie Manzanet-DanielsPeter H. [read post]
7 May 2024, 2:19 pm by Ilya Somin
It also helps explain why few people have "voted with their feet" to move to pro-choice states since Dobbs. [read post]
7 May 2024, 9:32 am by vforberger
As a result, only a few people who had representation have managed to challenge these administrative concealment penalties for Lost Wages Assistance. [read post]
7 May 2024, 9:31 am by Daniel M. Kowalski
This is recognized in the State Department’s Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM) at 9 FAM § 402.1-3 , which states that an “applicant desiring to come to the United States for one principal purpose, and one or more incidental purposes, must be classified in accordance with the principal purpose. [read post]
Starbucks (10(j) Relief Standard):  On April 23, 2024, oral argument before the United States Supreme Court took place in Starbucks Corp. v. [read post]
7 May 2024, 7:43 am by centerforartlaw
Source: USPTO  Rothschild moved to dismiss the complaint under the Second Circuit’s Rogers v. [read post]
6 May 2024, 8:39 am by centerforartlaw
Until 2016, different jurisdictions in the United States had different rules regarding art confiscated due to Nazi persecution. [read post]
6 May 2024, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
McCabe (concluding that the classification of marijuana was not rational); State v. [read post]